Is the Demoncrat going to produce better results for liberty than Moore? Go ahead make that claim, then try to back it up.

A victory for Moore will result in a much better voting record than a victory for the Demoncrat even from your point of view.

I would rather have a run-of-the-mill dem than set the precedent of having the mentally deranged, anti-liberty, christian taliban maniac that is Roy Moore serve as a senator. Some "Demoncrats" like Tulsi Gabbard are much better for the liberty movement than 98% of R's.

Originally Posted by hells_unicorn

Nope, I'd actually favor giving Baptists similar treatment to sodomites if they opt to proselytize their heresy in my presence.

I would rather have a run-of-the-mill dem than set the precedent of having the mentally deranged, anti-liberty, christian taliban maniac that is Roy Moore serve as a senator. Some "Demoncrats" like Tulsi Gabbard are much better for the liberty movement than 98% of R's.

Show me that the Dem is better.

Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Robert Heinlein

Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

Groucho Marx

I love mankindÖitís people I canít stand.

Linus, from the Peanuts comic

You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

Alexis de Torqueville

Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

Tell me the Demoncrat is better, I dare you, prove it to me and I might support him.

No matter what your opinion of Moore we don't have a better choice, when you can't get a total victory you must salami slice your way to your goals, the left has been doing it for generations it is about time we did the same.

A Libertarian Party candidate says Alabama voters need another choice for the U.S. Senate besides Democratic nominee Doug Jones and Republican Roy Moore.

Ron Bishop, an information technology professional who lives in Irondale, will officially announce his write-in candidacy at the Irondale Whistle Stop Festival today at noon.

"The two choices that we have now, they don't conform to what I think America needs to be," Bishop said.

Abortion
I Recognize that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides. I believe that government at all levels should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. Certainly no Federal taxpayer dollars should be spent on abortions.Budget
Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. I support the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.Civil Rights
Libertarians value the right of all to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. I therefore completely support the LGBT community in their struggle for equality. The government needs to get out of our bedrooms and our pocketbooks.
To this end, I believe we should also:
Protect freedom of religion, association, speech, press, and assembly.
Reverse the militarization of law-enforcement agencies.
Reform asset-forfeiture laws.
Restore Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Restore voting and gun rights for those convicted of non-violent drug offenses.
Fight against federal overreach and government spying programs.
Restrict law-enforcement use of general surveillance technologies.
Protect internet freedom & privacy.Crime
I believe that the label of “crime” should be limited to actions of force or fraud against another individual or group. I believe that such crimes should be prosecuted and punished by our justice system but that actions that don’t involve force or fraud should not be criminalized or penalized in the first place.
An example is the insane war on drugs. It should be ended immediately and any expenditures be spent on prevention and treatment instead of incarceration. A good place to start is with decriminalization of marijuana at the Federal Level.Economy
Free trade is the cornerstone of prosperity. We should be seeking ways to increase trade with other nations, not imposing restrictions and barriers. We should allow innovation, entrepreneurship, and invention to thrive in our county and not put burdensome regulations on them.Education
In a society of free people the government should have no role in education. It should certainly have no role in the development of political philosophy that will be utilized by the people in defining the government. For this and constitutional reasons there is no proper role for the Federal Government in education.Energy
In the complex and intertwined realm of Energy and the Economy it is best that the government stay out of the way and let the market adjust to the ever changing landscape. Energy sources that have become economically nonviable should not be subsidized. New innovations should be encouraged through low taxes across the board.Environment
Protecting the environment requires a clear understanding and enforcement of individual rights and responsibilities regarding resources like land, water, air, and wildlife.Foreign Policy
America is embroiled in stalemate wars all over the world. For too long we have allowed Washington to sacrifice our blood and treasure and it is time that we bring the troops home.
North Korea - Sadly North Korea is already a nuclear State. That is simply an unfortunate fact. The North Korean regime is feeding off of this make-believe war with the U.S. We should engage with China and partner with them in peaceful negotiations to dial down the rhetoric and discourage North Korea from building a nuclear arsenal.Government Reform
The U.S. Government has grown far beyond the bounds defined in Constitution and recommended by good sense. The best reform would be a sharp reduction in its scope and power.Guns
I believe in the fundamental right of the people to keep and bear arms protected by the second amendment to the Constitution.Health
I believe that each person has the right to make his or her own medical decisions. Libertarians support removing government meddling from healthcare. We think this and tort reform are the best ways to improve quality of healthcare, increase access to healthcare, and decrease prices of healthcare in our country.Immigration
We are a nation of immigrants. Every serious study has proven that immigration has made us stronger, not weaker. We should be encouraging immigration, simplifying the process for peace loving people of the world to join us in being the greatest nation on this planet, and NOT building walls.Infrastructure
There is a role for government in developing and maintaining infrastructure that is for the benefit of all. This activity should operate within a balanced budget and extremely limited use of eminent domain.Military
I support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. I would oppose any form of compulsory national service.Poverty
A strong and growing economy is the best way to alleviate poverty. Taxes should be lowered for all; free trade should be promoted. The minimum wage hurts those at the bottom rungs of the economic ladder the most; it should be eliminated.Social Security
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system.Taxes
I believe that taxes have the same effect as over-reaching regulations and are a confiscation of the property of other people. I advocate reducing and eliminating taxes whenever possible to free people and businesses to do what they do best, so that everyone can have a chance to succeed.Terrorism
If we have learned anything over the last decade or so, it's that we can't bomb our way out of the vexing problem of terrorism. We should reach out to and try to understand aggrieved individuals and populations. In this context we must maintain strong relations with our allies. Certainly the wrong path is the steady erosion of constitutional rights in the name of patriotism and security.Values
Freedom is the value that we Americans all hold in common. And we should remember that Freedom can only thrive in a culture of toleration and decency.

Some "Demoncrats" like Tulsi Gabbard are much better for the liberty movement than 98% of R's.

Actually she is better than exactly zero Republicans. Peter King is better. Anyone with R next to their name is better than Tulsi Gabbard. Susan Collins will accidentally vote correctly more often than Tulsi Gabbard. She is a Bernie Sanders Communist.

Actually she is better than exactly zero Republicans. Peter King is better. Anyone with R next to their name is better than Tulsi Gabbard. Susan Collins will accidentally vote correctly more often than Tulsi Gabbard. She is a Bernie Sanders Communist.

Foreign policy matters way more than all other issues. And Tulsi Gabbard is better than almost everyone on foreign policy. There is a middle ground, you know. Like what exists in the real world? Eventually some principles will have to be compromised... like the existence of government? I think Ron said it best in one of the 2012 debates when he said something along the lines of: Cut 2 billion in overseas spending for every 1 billion in domestic spending.

Government is incredibly wasteful, but we're not going to blow up the system tomorrow. Why not make allies with people that actually share some anti-war principles instead of writing them off as a communist because they naively overestimate the potential for government to do good?

Originally Posted by hells_unicorn

Nope, I'd actually favor giving Baptists similar treatment to sodomites if they opt to proselytize their heresy in my presence.

This country has definitely lost it's way when people have no faith in the Creator. Political Correctness has replaced the Golden Rule.

The golden rule, or rules like it, existed long before christianity or judaism, and are far more clearly stated. You still believe in fairy tales, as you just plainly admitted. Joseph Kony is a real person as well.

Originally Posted by hells_unicorn

Nope, I'd actually favor giving Baptists similar treatment to sodomites if they opt to proselytize their heresy in my presence.

Foreign policy is important for a lot of reasons. But Cuba has good foreign policy. It doesn't matter at all unless you have things taken care of domestically. It is nice that Gabbard has good views on Syria, but frankly that doesn't affect my life and most people in the US nearly as much as numerous other issues. The issues I care about in order of importance.

There is a middle ground, you know. Like what exists in the real world? Eventually some principles will have to be compromised... like the existence of government? I think Ron said it best in one of the 2012 debates when he said something along the lines of: Cut 2 billion in overseas spending for every 1 billion in domestic spending.

I support the existence of government. It is prerequisite to liberty. Ron didn't say it best. The amount of money spent overseas is peanuts. The United States spends 3.5% of GDP on the military- total. We spent 5% of GDP in 1950. We spent 10% in 1960. Bringing people home from overseas is probably good policy, but it does nothing to spending. Total military spending is about 17% of the total budget. Entitlement spending is two-thirds of the budget.

The golden rule, or rules like it, existed long before christianity or judaism, and are far more clearly stated. You still believe in fairy tales, as you just plainly admitted. Joseph Kony is a real person as well.

As a Christian the 'Golden Rule' stems from the Creator; not a religion.

Kony may very well be a real person, but the whole Kony agenda was a fraud.

"Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace." ~ Rod Serling
"Cops today are nothing but an armed tax collector" ~ Frank Serpico
"To be normal, to drink Coca-Cola and eat Kentucky Fried Chicken is to be in a conspiracy against yourself."
"People that don't want to make waves sit in stagnant waters."

Foreign policy is important for a lot of reasons. But Cuba has good foreign policy. It doesn't matter at all unless you have things taken care of domestically. It is nice that Gabbard has good views on Syria, but frankly that doesn't affect my life and most people in the US nearly as much as numerous other issues. The issues I care about in order of importance.

I support the existence of government. It is prerequisite to liberty. Ron didn't say it best. The amount of money spent overseas is peanuts. The United States spends 3.5% of GDP on the military- total. We spent 5% of GDP in 1950. We spent 10% in 1960. Bringing people home from overseas is probably good policy, but it does nothing to spending. Total military spending is about 17% of the total budget. Entitlement spending is two-thirds of the budget.

Obviously I really take issue with the order of the issues you have (I guess I think people not dying in needless wars is more important.) You kinda ignored that and just thought about how much it costs... And that number is understated anyways.

How many republicans actually want to reduce government spending? When it comes to action, not many. End the drug war? Few. Cutting taxes? Yes, but not for the people who need it most. Monetary policy? Almost No one cares, R or D. Health care? Obamacare style system was a republican compromise while liberals wanted single payer. Regulations? Reps want to remove those usually, until some corporation asks for one to deter competition, then they all will vote for it. Civil liberties? The party of the patriot act. Gabbard is definitely better on drug war, foreign policy, and she might be better on civil liberties too (I would have to check I'm not sure.) Worse on taxes, health care... Still way better than most reps in my mind.

i'm with Influenza - there is no more prudent fiscal and defense policy than cutting the $#@! out of our military budget and bringing troops home. that's important to me, but judge Godsquad seems to view Iran as a threat.

I think Tulsi Gabbard is a huge ally in this effort. and we've seen, she gets as much support from her party as Ron Paul did....

Rand totally $#@!ed up here, imo.

Seattle Sounders 2016 MLS Cup Champions - and the [un]official football club of RPF

Yeah, cuz endorsing a guy that after winning the GOP nomination came to DC and specifically requested/had a private meeting with Randal and snubbed all the bigwigs was a "$#@! up". Obviously Randal liked what he heard in their meet.

Foreign policy is important for a lot of reasons. But Cuba has good foreign policy. It doesn't matter at all unless you have things taken care of domestically. It is nice that Gabbard has good views on Syria, but frankly that doesn't affect my life and most people in the US nearly as much as numerous other issues. The issues I care about in order of importance.

I support the existence of government. It is prerequisite to liberty. Ron didn't say it best. The amount of money spent overseas is peanuts. The United States spends 3.5% of GDP on the military- total. We spent 5% of GDP in 1950. We spent 10% in 1960. Bringing people home from overseas is probably good policy, but it does nothing to spending. Total military spending is about 17% of the total budget. Entitlement spending is two-thirds of the budget.

All of that is true, but you have to remember that a lot of times war spending isn't even included in the regular budget. During the Iraq War, war spending was often times classified as "emergency spending," and it wasn't included in the regular budget. We spent at least two trillion on the Iraq War, and much of that spending wasn't included in the regular budget.

First off he should really not endorse anyone ever... but if he feels the need to, he should have done it when it mattered, such as during the primary. Doing it now means absolutely nothing and brings only negatives as a result.

Endorsing the primary opponents of sitting Republican Senators makes your colleagues hate you. No reason for it. Rand is one of the first big time politicians to endorse Moore anyway, so he's reaping all the rewards without any of the risk.

I agree but it was pretty obvious Luther was going to lose. And in a red state like Alabama, an endorsement during the general election means nothing.

You have that backwards actually... he is getting no benefit from the endorsement at all, and is only getting grief from it.

I would have voted for Mo Brooks in the primary. His policy seems to be not endorsing in primaries unless there is a very good reason. There wasn't a great candidate in this race.

Whether it is good idea to support Moore can be debated. I am certain Rand's reasoning is that Moore is crazy and likely to buck leadership. Moore has been very complimentary of Rand and is likely to move things in the right direction on budget issues given how close the vote is. Rand's endorsement and fundraising will have no affect on the vote but could very well have a big impact on how often Moore sides with Rand.

I am certain Rand's reasoning is that Moore is crazy and likely to buck leadership. Moore has been very complimentary of Rand and is likely to move things in the right direction on budget issues given how close the vote is. Rand's endorsement and fundraising will have no affect on the vote but could very well have a big impact on how often Moore sides with Rand.

And as I mentioned, Moore went to DC after winning the primary it to meet with Sen. Paul. I think its clear he asked for the endorsement and convinced Randal he would prove an ally on the important issues.

With that said, I got a fundraising email from moore last week and the whole email was about how his opponent loves trannies and wants to put trannies everwhere. And while I'm not party to the turn everybody into a tranny agenda, it certainly isn't an argument that is going to get me to open up my pocketbook.

And as I mentioned, Moore went to DC after winning the primary it to meet with Sen. Paul. I think its clear he asked for the endorsement and convinced Randal he would prove an ally on the important issues.

With that said, I got a fundraising email from moore last week and the whole email was about how his opponent loves trannies and wants to put trannies everwhere. And while I'm not party to the turn everybody into a tranny agenda, it certainly isn't an argument that is going to get me to open up my pocketbook.

You have that backwards actually... he is getting no benefit from the endorsement at all, and is only getting grief from it.

Grief from all the right people. Establishment hacks hate what Rand is doing, but he's winning huge points among grass roots conservatives. Rand's high profile paling around with Trump and his early endorsement of Moore is what gives Rand the political cover to get away with things like voting against the Health Care Bill without hurting his standing among the base.

Rand isn't getting grief from establishment people for endorsing a Republican nominee for Senate. Rand is however getting considerable grief from large portions of Rand's own base because of their distaste for Moore. It was unnecessary for Rand to endorse at all, and he gets zero benefit from endorsing after Moore already won the primary. But he is eroding support from his own base for doing so. There are a lot of legitimate reasons not to like Moore and Rand is attaching himself to him. If he was going to endorse Moore he should have done it when it mattered, during the primary, where it would have looked like his endorsement carries some weight.

It is actions like this which killed Rand during the 2016 Presidential campaign; he kept eroding his base until there was nothing left.

And for the record I'm glad Moore won because he will not be beholden to Mitch. But I also recognize that he isn't anything close to a libertarian either.

__________________________________________________ ________________"A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

Rand isn't getting grief from establishment people for endorsing a Republican nominee for Senate. Rand is however getting considerable grief from large portions of Rand's own base because of their distaste for Moore. It was unnecessary for Rand to endorse at all, and he gets zero benefit from endorsing after Moore already won the primary. But he is eroding support from his own base for doing so. There are a lot of legitimate reasons not to like Moore and Rand is attaching himself to him. If he was going to endorse Moore he should have done it when it mattered, during the primary, where it would have looked like his endorsement carries some weight.

It is actions like this which killed Rand during the 2016 Presidential campaign; he kept eroding his base until there was nothing left.

And for the record I'm glad Moore won because he will not be beholden to Mitch. But I also recognize that he isn't anything close to a libertarian either.

Rand Paul's "base" is not Libertarians. His base is grass roots conservatives, and they are very grateful for what he did, especially now with the Fake News hit attack by the Washington Post.

Actually she is better than exactly zero Republicans. Peter King is better. Anyone with R next to their name is better than Tulsi Gabbard. Susan Collins will accidentally vote correctly more often than Tulsi Gabbard. She is a Bernie Sanders Communist.

Yes, but which of these people would you want to be stuck with on a desert island.......naked with only a bottle of courvoisier and time to kill?

"Even an establishment Republican like Jerry Moran is far more libertarian you are." Traditional Conservative

"You're a far more horrible person than she (Bristol Palin) will ever be." angelatc

Don't pay the media to attack Rand
Every time you click on the attack articles, you are literally paying them for attacking Rand. If you really want people to see, quote the entire article and break the link.

"Take Joseph and Mary," Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler told the Washington Examiner. "Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus. There's just nothing immoral or illegal here. Maybe just a little bit unusual."

Last edited by Zippyjuan; 11-11-2017 at 07:29 PM.

"The only thing we have to fear is.... fear itself!" Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
"Be afwaid. Be berry afwaid" Donald Trump.

The optimists built this country and made it great- not the fearful. Fear can only destroy.